Because a tank costs about a million ISK generally, while LAV's have a Max cost of 400 k and move pretty damn fast.

This isn't exactly a nerf, because if this happens, an HAV with a full crew would be more effective than a full HAV is right now

WHAT? It would be a huge nerf. Many corps can field many tanks. As it stands right now, having three tanks on the field is much better than having one tank with a couple of guys in turrets. Also, with current cpu and pg stats, many good tanks do not have good small turrets. You see railgun and blaster tanks with l1 small missile turrets for a reason.

How would separating the driver from the gunner make them harder to kill? A driver can predict his next move without using a mic... because he is making the move. An additional gunner doesn't always know what move the driver will make next, and when is the right time to take the shot.

This would also destroy any form of vehicle combat in pub matches. I understand if you don't want a tank destroying noobs, I try to use railgun for mostly tank v tank, but the way to do this is by restricting what vehicles and gear can be used in pub matches. Making it so that one dumb **** blue dot is your gunner is a terrible idea.

Imo you don't truely understand how bad blue dots are until you drive a tank. They shoot at the enemy MCC, they shoot at your own tank and turret causing smoke and vibrations making it harder to use and see, they fire and overheat the small turrets randomly at no targets or your own tank so they can't be used against enemy infantry, they rarely leave the tank to capture objectives, and they love to fire shots that give away your position instead of waiting for the best time.

If you want to try using a large turret, ask a tanker in your corp to try out his tank, or skill into them yourself. Tankers skilled into large turrets so we can use them, and not some randumb blueberry or people without any points in large turrets.

Why do people say tanks require teamwork to use in one post, and then say that they are a one man army in the next? Just because you don't know how to use a tank doesn't mean it requires no teamwork to use. And teamwork doesn't mean some randumb guy mooching off your WP in your tank.

And like the other guy said, a good proto tank might cost 2mil. Don't you think a tank that costs five times more than your LAV should have some cool benefit that your LAV does not have?

WHAT? It would be a huge nerf. Many corps can field many tanks. As it stands right now, having three tanks on the field is much better than having one tank with a couple of guys in turrets.

How would separating the driver from the gunner make them harder to kill? A driver can predict his next move without using a mic... because he is making the move. An additional gunner doesn't always know what move the driver will make next, and when is the right time to take the shot.

This would also destroy any form of vehicle combat in pub matches. I understand if you don't want a tank destroying noobs, I try to use railgun for mostly tank v tank, but the way to do this is by restricting what vehicles and gear can be used in pub matches. Making it so that one dumb **** blue dot is your gunner is a terrible idea.

Imo you don't truely understand how bad blue dots are until you drive a tank. They shoot at the enemy MCC, they shoot at your own tank and turret causing smoke and vibrations making it harder to use and see, they fire and overheat the small turrets randomly at no targets or your own tank so they can't be used against enemy infantry, they rarely leave the tank to capture objectives, and they love to fire shots that give away your position instead of waiting for the best time.

If you want to try using a large turret, ask a tanker in your corp to try out his tank, or skill into them yourself. Tankers skilled into large turrets so we can use them, and not some randumb blueberry or people without any points in large turrets.

And like the other guy said, a good proto tank might cost 2mil. Don't you think a tank that costs five times more than your LAV should have some cool benefit that your LAV does not have?

lol already put down Mobius fo suggesting this dumb idea
to drop some logic on u OP what happens when MTACs and Fighters get added?
u gonna have 1 person operate the legs of the MTAC and 1 gun or have more than 1 person fly a jet?
ppl need to accept that there will be single manned vehicles thats just how it is

tanks already need support as is with either good gunners in the small turrets or ground infantry

ppl need to stop comparing LAVs and Dropships needing 2 ppl to a tank

Did you read my post? Things like fighters SHOULD be 1-man. How many tanks IRL have 1 person controlling everything? Now how many fighters?

Video games: Fun > Real life.

If you want to use the IRL argument, ask that we only fight on Earth and take out anything futuristic.

This is proving my point; tanks are easy to solo in, and don't need any teamwork.

If you're stupid enough to bring an HAV into a tiny ambush, you deserve to have it blown up.

Your HAV doesn't get easily blown up by everything capable of halfassed AV, does it? LAVs can't survive if they stop moving, while tanks can; however, tanks don't need to stop moving if they only have 1 person, but LAVs do.

I'm getting confused by small blasters recently. Now that I've specced into using them as more or less my primary weapon, I've found that killing with them is a breeze. Everything, including heavies and other LAVs, are getting cut down very quickly- all I'm using is a 20GJ scattered blaster on my methana.

However, it seems that whenever someone else guns for me, they can't get a single kill!

That's what LAVs are like right now, if you can't stand being put down to the same level as everyone else, then **** you.

._. What? Tanks can easily be blown up by "halfassed AV". You even go as far to say that they get blown up so easily in ambush that they shouldn't be used at all.

._. You realize that vehicles can help each other, right? There are even logi LAVs and you can even fit a HAV to be a logi type too.

If you want a 4 man tank then the base hp of shield/armor needs to be increase by 50% at least so that it requires more than 1 person in AV to kill it

Also allow driver to boot anyone from all the guns if need be so blue dots dont take up room

Just enable being able to switch to first person viewing with zooming just like WOT

That way, can focus on either task of moving, or shooting.

I can say from experience that both need a buff. LAV's need more eHP and CPU/PG, and HAV's need slightly more speed and CPU/PG. Also, there should be a different class of vehicle that's has more eHP than HAV's And the driver gets a small turret. No need to already nerf the already bad vehicles. Anyways, I'll pretend you haven't used them, in a sad attempt to validate my opinion

I am in favor of tank change to separate driver-gunners.

It would be more consistent as of all the current vehicles it is the one that can shoot solo. As it is the powerhouse of the three, it is a bit strange to have it this current way.


Would that hurt or help tank operators?
Both.
- Having a minimum of two is a tremendous handicap for the operating team - but that can be considered an acceptable price to have such a behemoth.
+ It would be easier to concentrate on aiming, especially smaller targets.
- It would be more difficult playing peek-a-boo, doing those quick out of cover shots before backing into cover.
+ It would be easier to use active modules - they are currently quite impractical.
- It might be harder to drive backwards, although driver might be given ability to rotate view.
+ On the other hand, it would be easier to make a fighting retreat, the driver could concentrate on road and obstacles while the turret could still do semi-effective shooting.
- On general, it would take more effort to take most out of the effectiveness of a tank as teamwork and communication would be paramount (that could also be considered as a good point as anything which promotes teamwork... Is good.)
+ Tank would have more sets of eyes and better awareness, especially to back.


I would really like to see tanks as roaring mobile vantage points having turrets able to shoot in all directions, requiring teamwork.


And leave the role of 100% solo operated equipment to future MTACs, which would have huge weakness in their blind backside.

This post is the worst idea in the world, not the worst but who's Gunna risk their spendy tank when u might get a ****** turret operator, unless of course in order to use the tank as gunners you had to put in 25% of the isk for the tank cost before being able to bored the tank.

I'm still all for advocating this idea.
Force first person vehicle views, add enter and exit animations and it's pure gold.
I know, you hate those suggestions.

But until you can control who is in your tank it makes its useless where chances are a blue dot may get the main turret so the ****** will fire at anything

Until tank driver can lock the doors and boot out any and all gunners if they want to this will continue to be a bad idea as it stands

If every other vehicle currently has to deal with it, changing tanks to work that way would be balance, until it's fixed.

That's what LAVs are like right now, if you can't stand being put down to the same level as everyone else, then **** you.

McBob, you know this will break HAVs. Why not ask for improvements to LAVs? Asking CCP to make others unhappy because you aren't happy is ._. I believe CCP is balancing the game based on corp vs corp battles, and not pub stomping.

IMO you should make a thread about changes you'd like to see in LAVs. I don't support breaking tanks, but I definitely believe that the role of LAVs needs to be tweaked.

I see LAVs as support vehicles. I would love it if LAVs became the vehicle equivalent of a logibro. I would have no problem with CCP removing the turret and replacing it with an extra seat. Right now we have four man squads, but only three seats! Their defense could be running people over lol. Or maybe people in the LAV could shoot out of it with small weapons?

Drive-by LAV with SMGs and pistols would be so awesome! It might even make more people spec into small weapons.

if u get a bad gunner in a LAV at least u can roadkill ppl if u get a bad gunner in a tank ur screwed.

I'm not saying to ruin the game for tanks- I'm saying to make it consistent in the idea that no vehicle with multiple seats should be possible to be a one man army in.

I can understand that position, but any tank that tries to be a one man army will get demolished.

Tanks do seem like a one man army, and I thought they were too before I started driving and skilling one. There is so much strategy and teamwork that is required to successfully use a tank. I'm not talking about stuff like railgun sniping, because tanks that do that are most likely not supporting infantry.

Tanks are very easy to kill. For instance, a proto forge gun deals more damage than a proto railgun on a tank. AV nades and swarms are no-skill weapons that can easily kill armor HAVs. HAVs can actually be solod in a large number of situations.

Tanks are also a formidable weapon on the field. When used correctly, tanks need at least one other person supporting them, or even the whole team. What you are asking for will not make a good tank into a two-man vehicle, it will make a good tank into a three to four man vehicle. Requiring even more people than are already needed to operate a tank is not a buff.

I know you probably won't believe me about tanks not being a one man army, but if CCP is seriously considering this, could CCP please listen to the comms of a skilled tank during a corp battle or hard pub game? (I'm sure they'd give it the ok!) Tankers don't want to give out their strategy to everyone who reads forums.

I guess another example is what happened to me. I started using tanks a week or two ago, and I sucked. It was bad. I got blown up by everything. Slap gave me lots of help ^^ and now I can kill some tanks. I'm obviously not the best tanker in the game, but I'm no longer the worst!

The biggest change I made to stay alive long enough to kill something was: strategy and teamwork.

edit: made my post before Breaking Stuff made his, but I also agree with what he said.

Didn't know that was possible...

I like cats. They taste great.

Ok now that the childish streak is over with...

back on topic, punks.

There are two schools of thought here, both are equally valid. Do you specialize so that you get good at one thing, and one thing only, then expand from there?

Or do you get a solid, broad base and insure you will not be found with your pants around your ankles?

This is a personal decision and there's really no one right answer, because some people (like me) want overall competence and flexibility.

Others want to be the nova knife slashing through their chosen situation like a scout shotty on a newly-spawned protobear.

I sortof understand what you're saying, but I don't understand what this has to do with the thread.

i was posting in the wrong window. So I suggest you edit what i was saying to sound as Derp as possible. have fun with it. I do.

Edit: TL;DR version of the OP: tanks suck because they are efficient, they need the driver and gunner separate.

TL;DR response: You are a freaking moron, OP.

They aren't 'efficient' they are different. They aren't tanks either, no matter how often we call them such. They are, for all intents and purposes, an LAV after a binge. Why they are different is what the OP is attempting to answer, and all the HAV drivers jumped him for trying to make them equal to everyone else.

A tank is expensive. If you field one out of your own singular pocket, then you are missing the point of a corporation. Even if you intend to fund it from an EVE profile, that's still two different 'you's with a massive difference in pay grades. HAVs are a squad support vehicle, not a single man power-up. Will the driver lose his ability to fire and move? Yes. Will that make him any different from any other driver? No.

nobody wants to be a driver that cannot accrue warpoints. In fact this is a primary reason people don't fly dropships. They're a surefire way of losing 300k ISK and little else. CRU dropships get parked on an impossible-to-reach roof and left there as an impromptu droplink and left for the duration.

And screw you, no, if you can afford a tank and willing to risk it you are ENTIRELY justified in expecting to be able to rock out and party with a blaster like it's the night before the apocalypse. if you hate tanks do what I'm doing. train forge guns to 5 and forge gun proficiency to 5 and go hunt them mercilessly with an Ishukone Assault Forge Gun. they die in rapid order to those.

Tanks are not OP. There's a distinct shortage of people who know how to fight them without the zerg rush, or half a dozen militia forges or swarms. If you're not going to try to do that wait till there's more people like me who get a woody making them go pop.

nobody wants to be a driver that cannot accrue warpoints. In fact this is a primary reason people don't fly dropships. They're a surefire way of losing 300k ISK and little else. CRU dropships get parked on an impossible-to-reach roof and left there as an impromptu droplink and left for the duration.

And screw you, no, if you can afford a tank and willing to risk it you are ENTIRELY justified in expecting to be able to rock out and party with a blaster like it's the night before the apocalypse. if you hate tanks do what I'm doing. train forge guns to 5 and forge gun proficiency to 5 and go hunt them mercilessly with an Ishukone Assault Forge Gun. they die in rapid order to those.

Tanks are not OP. There's a distinct shortage of people who know how to fight them without the zerg rush, or half a dozen militia forges or swarms. If you're not going to try to do that wait till there's more people like me who get a woody making them go pop.

Fine, but if you are JUSTIFIED in bringing in a tank on your lonesome, the lone AV specialist who kills you is equally just, deal?

Also, if HAVs are meant to be your little solo 'rock out' then why do so many HAV users pussyfoot their red line for fear of loss? Because their lone tailpipe can't afford it. If you can afford to buy a Titan for yourself, congrats at your opulence, but it doesn't make it any less badly suited to 1 v 1.

Also, I did do what you are doing. I spent an entire build doing nothing but that. I spent another build tanking, and another using the HMG, and still one more being a Logi Bro. I've seen a tank from all sides.

Blowing up other peoples' expensive investments is kinda my hobby. But I'm not advocating making tanks invulnerable. far from it. Don't take away the driver's turret control. That's it. it's a ******** idea because unless you and Johnny B. Shotmyself over there tagteaming a tank have spent real world time driving and gunning in an M-1 Abrams YOU DO NOT know how to set up an optimal shot.

I've seen tank drivers having a hard time setting up shots to take things ddown. i have less problems because I'm a cheapass that uses blasters and consider my own tanks to be expendable LOLroll machines that someone gets to brag about smashing.

They have my blessing, because my average ISK payout is enough for a militia soma each battle. I cheer when they pop my LOLroll hull and end my murderous rampages.

Then I go rampage in a dropsuit and do even more damage.

However. there is no reason to believe that your average blueberry is more than a lukewarm IQ moron who thinks he's slick sh** and fails to prioritize threats. Second sometimes when the tank is moving drivers hit **** that botches your aim. Finally, you bought a tank. Who am I to tell you that it's not your perogative to hose down your enemies with cannon fire?

Just understand I won't apologize when I kill you. And i will chase you like an angry bloodhound who wants nothing more than to make you cry. Because you took away his treats.

There's a lot of Derp in that thar post.

1.because the HAV has a critical weakness if you force it to use a gunner. that's one less set of boots on the ground looking to intercept me before I put a shot through it's glacis plate.

2. I don't normally die to the tanks when i'm tank hunting. it's the infantry the tank is supporting that usually nail me.

3. Plus you have not made any point that convinces me that tank drivers need to lose gun control. Your arguments are anecdotal and quite frankly misinformed.

4. A driver parking on a slight incline is quite capable of putting the tank at enough of an angle that a gunner cannot depress the cannon enough to shoot me as I stand nearby merrily chucking AV grenades from the center of a nanohive. the driver also using the main cannon can correct this very quickly.

5. Also. If the driver (who has ISK invested in not having his tank pop like a zit) spots a threat and the gunner doesn't? or ignores the driver who;s screaming on comms that there's a madrugar sighting down on them? or worse? An Immobile Infantry forgegun execution line preparing a twenty-one gun salute?

6. Until you give me a compelling reason why tanks should require a four man crew, I'm not going to agree. Because it nerfs the effectiveness of tanks by slowing down the reaction time. And It punishes the HAV driver who spent a lot of SP pumping up not only the tank and relevant module skills, but the turret control skills to be able to shoot effectively.

7. You're talking about the equivalent of taking a heavy and making it so he can;t fire the HMG unless a scout spoons with him and helps pull the trigger.

ARRGH STOP POINTING OUT THAT TANKS HAVE AN OBVOUSLY UNFAIR ADVANTAGE OVER EVERY VEHICLE IN THE GAME

how are tanks Overpowered?

a forge gun equivalent to the tank pretty much 2-4 shot kills it.

Oh wait, are U mad your AV grenades don't instapop the caldari tanks?

Swap to Flux nades, they strip shields like a boss.

The HAVs have been nerfed to hell. they don't need another nerf.

And when I say my LOLroll tank? I mean the cheapseat thing i have the skills for that me and my family make bets on how long it takes someone to pop me. It's a bucket of laughs. I think I lost like eight of them in a row over the course of three battles.

It was a blast.

Who said tanks are OP? And you've spent too much of this thread assuming that drivers are never blueberries, but gunners always are. Have I ever told you about the time I hopped into the small blaster of a random blueberry's HAV? The driver (using a large blaster) got 1 or 2 kills before an AVer took it out. I got at least 5, and they didn't even fire a shot by the time I got most of the kills.

yet you still have not explained why thiss change should happen beyond it fits your mental model of symmetry somehow.

Not good enough

Read the thread. Until you do, your opinion has absolutely no weight.

Instead of asking CCP to change what already exists why not ask for a variation?

If you want a HAV that needs a seperate gunner to driver why not request that aswell as having a solo HAV?

If you were to put it to the community I would put money on people wanting it to stay as it is but im sure they wouldnt say no to having the option to have a two man HAV.

The more of a variety the better

Then perhaps it could be a completely different variation altogether. The current ones could be light tanks; a variant with a separately controlled main turret could be a heavy tank- as the name suggests, it would be tougher to encourage the use of them.

You haven't given any reason why tanks should be different, the only support is that it is that way, and so it should stay.

Then perhaps it could be a completely different variation altogether. The current ones could be light tanks; a variant with a separately controlled main turret could be a heavy tank- as the name suggests, it would be tougher to encourage the use of them.

Instead of asking CCP to change what already exists why not ask for a variation?

If you want a HAV that needs a seperate gunner to driver why not request that aswell as having a solo HAV?

If you were to put it to the community I would put money on people wanting it to stay as it is but im sure they wouldnt say no to having the option to have a two man HAV.

The more of a variety the better

It's a decent idea, and it has been proposed before, but there was a roadblock that killed it then that I shall divulge now. If you make what we dubbed the Super Heavy Attack Vehicle(SHAV) stronger than the HAV by the same degree that the HAV is two steps above the LAV, then it's too damn strong. The HAV would need to be weakened, becoming less damaging, less durable, maybe even physically smaller, and faster so that the SHAV would still be stronger and slower by comparison, but not as strong as it would have to be otherwise, ROFLstomping instillation and such. And I'm sure you see exactly what happened from there...

Updated OP.

While I firmly believe this change would make it easier for me to murder you in your shiny sagaris marauders, with a militia forge gun (I will kill one of you buttheads one of these days) I must say that this thread's premise is dumb.

By requiring a turret gunner you render the OWNER of the tank largely impotent to defend his very expensive piece of gear. and while I frequently say ISK paid should not translate to niche protection, a 2 million ISK tank should equate to 2 million ISK of tank shock and require another tank or a Heavy who plays like me (for teh trollz) in a proto fit to easily demolish your toys.

this would, in fact, remove a lot of the difficulty because the drivers do not usually consider optimal firing positions for their gunners when engaging. thusly making them easy meat for me to pick off.

so while Heavies need a buff...

this in not the buff you are looking for. this is taking away any fun factor for the drivers of tanks and punishing them for cranking oodles of skills into turret improvements.

besides, it's the future. The driver plugs himself in and controls the main functions of the tank with his mind. he's a mini-capsuleer.

Bad idea is bad and you should be ashamed of yourself.

lol already put down Mobius fo suggesting this dumb idea
to drop some logic on u OP what happens when MTACs and Fighters get added?
u gonna have 1 person operate the legs of the MTAC and 1 gun or have more than 1 person fly a jet?
ppl need to accept that there will be single manned vehicles thats just how it is

tanks already need support as is with either good gunners in the small turrets or ground infantry

ppl need to stop comparing LAVs and Dropships needing 2 ppl to a tank